Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Computational Thinking in the Context of Science and Engineering Practices: A Self-Regulated Learning Approach

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Digital Technologies: Sustainable Innovations for Improving Teaching and Learning

Abstract

Computational thinking has often been overlooked in the K-12 settings, particularly in the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). In this chapter, we present a social cognitive self-regulated learning approach for infusing computational thinking into teaching settings using science and engineering practices of NGSS. Self-regulated learning related to computational thinking is viewed as a goal-directed process whereby a learner is required to identify a problem, examine relevant data to inform a solution, develop a solution, and evaluate the solution. Illustrations on how self-regulated learning cycles can become mechanisms to model and assess student computational thinking as students are engaged in science and engineering practices are provided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Design, 48(4), 63–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Jones, B. F., Rasmussen, C. M., & Moffitt, M. C. (1997). Psychology in the classroom: A series on applied educational psychology. Real-life problem solving: A collaborative approach to interdisciplinary learning. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10266-000

    Google Scholar 

  5. De Corte, E., Mason, L., Depaepe, F., & Verschaffel, L. (2011). Self-regulation of mathematical knowledge and skills. In Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 155–172). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203839010.ch10

    Google Scholar 

  6. Reschly, A. L., Huebner, E. S., Appleton, J. J., & Antaramian, S. (2008). Engagement as flourishing: The contribution of positive emotions and coping to adolescents’ engagement at school and with learning. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 419–431. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K- 12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  8. De Corte, E. (2011). Constructive, self-regulated, situated, and collaborative learning: An approach for the acquisition of adaptive competence. The Journal of Education, 192(2/3), 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022057412192002-307

    Google Scholar 

  9. Rich, P. J., & Hodges, C. B. (2017). Emerging research, practice, and policy on computational thinking. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  10. Tatar, D., Harrison, S., Stewart, M., Frisina, C., & Musaeus, P. (2017). Proto-computational thinking: The uncomfortable underpinnings. In P. J. Rich & C. B. Hodges (Eds.), Emerging research, practice, and policy on computational thinking (pp. 63–84). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Wing, J. M. (2006). A vision for the 21st century: Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Aho, A. V. (2012). Computation and computational thinking. The Computer Journal, 55(7), 832–835. https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/bxs074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Wing, J. (2011). Research notebook: Computational thinking—What and why? The Link Magazine, Spring. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Curzon, P., & McOwan, P. W. (2016). The power of computational thinking: Games, magic and puzzles to help you become a computational thinker. New Jersey: World Scientific.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Boekaerts, P. P., Pintrich, P. R., & Zeidner, M. (2000). Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). San Diego, CA: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Schunk, D. H., & Greene, J. A. (Eds.). (2018). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social-cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Cleary, T. J., Velardi, B., & Schnaidman, B. (2017). Effects of the self-regulation empowerment program (SREP) on middle school students’ strategic skills, self-efficacy, and mathematics achievement. Journal of School Psychology, 64, 28–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Peters, E. E., & Kitsantas, A. (2010). Self-regulation of student epistemic thinking in science: The role of metacognitive prompts. Educational Psychology, 30(1), 27–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kitsantas, A., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2009). College students’ homework and academic achievement: The mediating role of self-regulatory beliefs. Metacognition and Learning, 4(2), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9028-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cleary, T. (Ed.). (2015). School psychology series. Self-regulated learning interventions with at-risk youth: Enhancing adaptability, performance, and well-being. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14641-000

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kitsantas, A., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Comparing self-regulatory processes among novice, non-expert, and expert volleyball players: A microanalytic study. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14(2), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200252907761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kolovelonis, A., Goudas, M., Dermitzaki, I., & Kitsantas, A. (2013). Self-regulated learning and performance calibration among elementary physical education students. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(3), 685–701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0135-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Peters-Burton, E. E., & Botov, I. S. (2017). Self-regulated learning microanalysis as a tool to inform professional development delivery in real-time. Metacognition and Learning, 12(1), 45–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9160-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Peters-Burton, E. E., Cleary, T. J., & Forman, S. G. (2015). Professional development contexts that promote self-regulated learning and content learning in trainees. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/14641-010

  27. Denning, P. J. (2017). Remaining trouble spots with computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 60(6), 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Cleary, T. J., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2004). Self-regulation empowerment program: A school- based program to enhance self-regulated and self-motivated cycles of student learning. Psychology in the Schools, 41(5), 537–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Thomas, J. W., & Rohwer, W. D., Jr. (1986). Academic studying: The role of learning strategies. Educational Psychologist, 21, 19–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Rohrkemper, M. (1989). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: A Vygotskian view. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research and practice (pp. 143–167). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Wang, M. C., & Peverly, S. T. (1986). The self-instructive process in classroom learning contexts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11, 370–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Henderson, R. W. (1986). Self-regulated learning: Implications for the design of instructional media. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11, 405–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Pape, S. J., Bell, C. V., & Yetkin-Özdemir, I. E. (2013). Sequencing components of mathematics lessons to maximize development of self-regulation: Theory, practice, and intervention. In H. Bembenutty, T. J. Cleary, & A. Kitsantas (Eds.), Applications of self-regulated learning across diverse disciplines: A tribute to Barry J. Zimmerman (pp. 29–58). Charlotte, NC: IAP Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kitsantas, A., Zimmerman, B. J., & Cleary, T. (2000). The role of observation and emulation in the development of athletic self-regulation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 811–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kitsantas, A., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Self-regulation of motoric learning: A strategic cycle view. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 10(2), 220–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413209808406390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. McPherson, G. E., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2011). Self-regulation of musical learning: A social cognitive perspective on developing performance skills. In R. Colwell & P. Webster (Eds.), MENC handbook of research on music learning, volume 2: Applications (pp. 130–175). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (1998). Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Grover, S., Pea, R., & Cooper, S. (2015). Designing for deeper learning in a blended computer science course for middle school students. Computer Science Education, 25(2), 199–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42, 38–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Yadav, A., Zhou, N., Mayfield, C., Hambrusch, S., & Korb, J. T. (2011). Introducing computational thinking in education courses. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 465–470). Dallas, TX: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Yadav, A., Mayfield, C., Zhou, N., Hambrusch, S., & Korb, J. T. (2014). Computational thinking in elementary and secondary teacher education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 14(1), 5–21.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Cleary, T. J. (2011). Emergence of self-regulated learning microanalysis: Historical overview, essential features, and implications for research and practice. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 329–345). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12: What is involved and what is the role of the computer science education community? ACM Inroads, 2(1), 48–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: Achieve.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Johnson, C. C., Walton, J., & Peters-Burton, E. E. (in press). STEM road map for elementary school: Transportation in the future. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Peters, E. E. (2012). Developing content knowledge in students through explicit teaching of the nature of science: Influences of goal setting and self-monitoring. Science & Education, 21(6), 881–898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9219-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. White, M. C., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2015). Self-regulation and the common core: Application to ELA standards. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Cooper, S., Forbes, J., Fox, A., Hambrusch, S., Ko, A., & Simon, B. (2016). The importance of computing education research. arXiv preprint retrieved at arXiv:1604.03446.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Franklin, D. (2015). Putting the computer science in computing education research. Communications of the ACM, 58(2), 34–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Czerkawski, B. C., & Lyman, E. W. (2015). Exploring issues about computational thinking in higher education. TechTrends, 59(2), 57–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Denning, P. J. (2009). The profession of IT beyond computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 52(6), 28–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA

    Erin E. Peters-Burton & Anastasia Kitsantas

  2. Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, NJ, USA

    Timothy J. Cleary

Authors
  1. Erin E. Peters-Burton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Timothy J. Cleary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anastasia Kitsantas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erin E. Peters-Burton .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Digital Systems, University of Piraeus, Piraeus, Greece

    Demetrios Sampson

  2. Learning, Design and Technology, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

    Dirk Ifenthaler

  3. Department of Learning Technologies, University of North Texas, Denton, Texas, USA

    J. Michael Spector

  4. Institute for Teaching & Learning Innovation (ITaLI), The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia

    Pedro Isaías

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Peters-Burton, E.E., Cleary, T.J., Kitsantas, A. (2018). Computational Thinking in the Context of Science and Engineering Practices: A Self-Regulated Learning Approach. In: Sampson, D., Ifenthaler, D., Spector, J., Isaías, P. (eds) Digital Technologies: Sustainable Innovations for Improving Teaching and Learning. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73417-0_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73417-0_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73416-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73417-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation